Pastor Plek's Podcast
Pastor Plek's Podcast
Gender, Parenting, and Personhood: The Impact of Trump's Executive Order
339: Pastor Plek, Cody Sparks, Pastor Holland and Adrienne Plekenpol offer their distinct perspectives on a monumental shift in policy with President Donald Trump's executive order. By reaffirming a two-gender status and defining personhood from conception, this directive aims to reshape not only transgender policies but also the abortion debate. Together they unpack the profound implications of defining male and female roles strictly by reproductive capabilities and consider how this could impact constitutional rights and influence the broader legal landscape in America.
Got questions? Text us at 737-231-0605!
Like, share, and subscribe! We love seeing and responding to your reviews and comments.
Support the show: https://wbcc.churchcenter.com/giving
and welcome back to pastor plex podcast. We are live right now, uh, and joining me in the studio is none other cody sparks, the cody sparks band. We can't actually see him but we're here though. Yeah, we're here uh and then we also have holl from Eastside Community Church Greetings, and he is here. And then the woman who does not have a zit on her forehead no, I'm alive, it is Adrian joining us with a burn mark on her forehead. Do not judge her, that would be. We couldn't handle that.
Speaker 2:How's the head, adrian? It's just a little burned. You know, I got a little burn right where you would think that there would be a zit, but don't worry, there's only a few wrinkles.
Speaker 1:Is it like worse to have a zit than to have like a burn?
Speaker 2:Yeah, oh yeah, a zit's worse than a burn.
Speaker 1:Does that say like you don't take care of yourself?
Speaker 3:A burn's just like an accident to anyone. That's right. Zit probably means that you have personal problems.
Speaker 1:Still brave of you to come here today, though.
Speaker 2:Yeah, you really, you know.
Speaker 1:Holland did recommend you wear a hat and you said no, I'm just going full burn. I'm just going to be proud, okay, well, you guys listen, we were sitting here talking about what we were actually going to talk about and the, the audience, the live studio audience all called out we want to hear about the executive order that donald trump just signed about the two gender status. Um holland, can you give us a quick review of what he just signed and what that means?
Speaker 3:so donald trump is now the president of the united states? He is now the president. Yes, and he started off signing a bunch of executive orders, did he do?
Speaker 1:this at the Capital One building. Is that where he started signing stuff, or was that today?
Speaker 2:Yesterday.
Speaker 1:At the Capital One arena. He was just signing up a storm.
Speaker 2:No, I don't think he was at the arena.
Speaker 1:Because I saw him have a desk there so I assumed it would be.
Speaker 2:I consumed a lot of information yesterday.
Speaker 1:Did I consumed a lot of information yesterday. Did you consume about? Did he go back to the Oval Office or something?
Speaker 2:I saw him in the Oval Office with a bunch of executive orders oh nice.
Speaker 3:No, I believe he did it also, like you said, live in front of however many thousands of people.
Speaker 2:He did do it live on his way out of the inauguration.
Speaker 1:Yeah, because it seemed like a huge waste of a Donald Trump moment, because he knows how to capture like. Here's the one executive order you've been waiting for me to sign.
Speaker 2:So he did do that and I just I don't know about it being in front of the arena.
Speaker 3:Live executive order signings is pretty cool.
Speaker 1:Yeah, it is very awesome, Like you can go, I was there, okay, so what was the executive order?
Speaker 3:on gender. So here's one of them. Yeah, starts off. I'm just going to read some of it and it says uh, section one purpose.
Speaker 3:Across the country, ideologues who deny the biological reality of sex have increasingly used legal and other socially coercive means to permit men to self-identify as women and gain access to intimate single sex, single sex spaces and activities designed for women, from women's domestic abuse shelters to women's workplace showers. This is wrong. Efforts to eradicate the biological reality of sex fundamentally attack women by depriving them of their dignity, safety and well-being. The erasure of sex in language and policy has a corrosive impact not just on women but on the validity of the entire American system. Okay, and then he goes on talking for a little while and then he starts.
Speaker 3:It gets into section two, policy and definitions. Okay, here's what I think is really interesting. Okay, here we go. He's going to define, you know, woman and man and male and female and sex and gender and stuff. But in the definition, you know, everyone knew this part was coming too. He said he was going to do this, but in the definition he actually defines personhood as beginning at conception. Oh, wow, which is so like the in terms of like, uh, not just impacting transgender stuff, but also the abortion issue. Sure, because, um, what some people would say is like, okay, you can say life begins at conception. Sure, that's a human life, but it doesn't have personhood until and that's where you, you know a person is someone who has constitutional rights and hasn't trump like sort of backed off the abortion thing?
Speaker 1:yes, and now this seems like a reversal and it's like full charge, a thousand percent. Or do you think he knew what he was doing?
Speaker 3:I have no idea. Yeah, but it's uh, it's not a explicit, you know. So, like he backed off in the— when you could get an abortion, what's it called? Yes, he basically said—I'm trying to think of the name for it. It's online, it's where they give—.
Speaker 1:Is it late-term abortions or early-term? No, no, no.
Speaker 3:I'm talking about where they list out their policies, their party platform, platform, party platform. So in the Republican Party platform, the one that he made last year, it was way less detailed, way more brief and it basically just said like we're against late term abortions, right. So he backed off big time and no one really knew where he was going to go. And this isn't like an explicit, like recanting of that. It's actually just something embedded implicitly in an anti-transgender deal. So what he said, what it says here, is like um, female means a person belonging at conception to the sex that produces the large reproductive cell and male means a person belonging at conception to the sex that produces the small reproductive cell. So defining male and female based on sex from conception and calling that a person, even at conception, so I think that's huge. That is huge, your thoughts.
Speaker 1:Yeah, the reason why I think that's huge is because now you could argue the reason why—now, granted, this is an executive order and so I don't necessarily think it holds the weight of law, but, um, it does go the right direction. I think the only part that's problematic with executive orders is everybody knows that can be reversed in four years or whenever someone is no longer in office. And the other problem with it it's not a law, but it is going the right direction. It is giving a definition that the that the government is going to go by, because all the other insanity definitions that that Biden gave over the past four years on gender was like you know, there is no.
Speaker 1:You can mark X for neutral or whatever you want. Not X is like X, y or whatever, but it's it's. You can mark whatever you wanted for a gender, and that was a legally accepted document, whereas now you cannot. It's either male or female. And I think that's a positive thing for truth, not just for Christianity, although I'm obviously for Christianity, I'm for all that but I just think for society as a whole to have to believe in science again, which I think is sort of wild to say, but like, kind of like, say it's not a feeling, that is your sex, it's an actual reality.
Speaker 3:Yeah, when he stood up and said like there will only be two genders now and everyone cheered you're like whoa, how crazy did things get that. People are cheering for that statement, right. Which is like one of the most basic you know.
Speaker 1:Yeah, A hundred years ago, if someone said there is only male and female, everyone been like. Right, yeah, like okay, what else but for that to be like the roar of the crowd moment? What else but for that to be like the roar of the crowd moment, adrian, as for you as a woman, let's hear from your perspective of like, how that makes you feel as a lady over there who doesn't have to worry about men in your bathrooms. Have you had to worry about men in your bathrooms?
Speaker 2:You know I have not, which is nice, but I've been really grateful not to have a daughter during all this. This seems like a good direction, that we're going right, and here's the other thing I feel I will. Let me just talk about what has been on my mind because you know how the algorithm of facebook works yeah, facebook works.
Speaker 2:Yeah, so, like all of my, liberal ACU graduate friends were not ever like. They were never in my newsfeed until yesterday and then now my whole newsfeed is them and they are sending condolences. I was trying to look up one, but they're they're, they're. They're sending condolences to everyone who feels hopeless now, who feels that hate has won, and that's that's. That's the verbiage is like we're so sorry that hate has won, intolerance has won, we're so sorry for this world. And they're apologizing on behalf of somebody for two to a demographic of unspecified that they don't actually know them.
Speaker 2:Right, or maybe they do know some people who are feeling hurt, and then and then the theology behind their, their consolation, is to let love fill, you know, let belief is enough. Believes that the loves of seeds of God will multiply. Let belief is enough. Believes that the loves of seeds of God will multiply. And it's like they're trying to create some hope that maybe God might be sufficient for the hatred that seems seemingly permeating and it's everywhere. And then, on top of that, of course, they're doing what they've always done, which is take certain little bitty things out of context and blow them up, and and that's irritating and, I guess, to be expected. But I think what I have been most, what is so significant to me is when you tell the world there are two genders male, female for that to be?
Speaker 1:should we say the word gender? I mean, is that giving a nod to the weirdo that made up the term gender, two sexes? But maybe, maybe we were. Just we're so beyond that now because that that word was made up in the 50sies. Okay, sex, sorry, and I don't mean to make that a big deal, but, like, is that a nod to what's his name that invented the term and his crazy sex tests?
Speaker 1:Because you know about that, well, the only reason we watched what is a woman, right? Yeah, and that's where I learned from that, that it was the. The term gender was coined in the fifties and and so we just sort of all adopted it, which then brought this thing to, which was sort of helpful in some ways, like what gender are you? You know cause I, whenever I saw sex back when I was growing up in the eighties sex I would write yes, and I think I was so funny and then, but then now it became it's very revealing.
Speaker 1:Yeah, you know, like you know you're eight years old. You think you're the funniest person ever. Like, you know what? Yeah, sex, yes, please.
Speaker 3:So like um, so but so that's the usefulness of gender is to prevent that eight-year-olds from that particular situation okay I see that's probably the only place I can see it.
Speaker 1:It really is helpful. But I don't want to give another nod to the, to the guy that came up with the gender ideology and and start calling it that. But I'm not. I don't want to be over the top either. I'm just wondering if that's a thing. Yeah, good question.
Speaker 2:Listen, I don't know.
Speaker 2:So we can just call it. We can call it sex. Call it sex. No-transcript is so interesting to me because of the same okay, on the other side of the same coin you have those same people parenting right, this gentle parenting that says my child should have no boundaries and like let's let the children decide what they're like. When you let the child be the decision maker and the leader of themselves, you have a very unhappy child and you can go anywhere in the general public, would you say this is where the suicide stuff comes from.
Speaker 2:Absolutely, because kids are like kids are not. They don't know, they only know what they've been taught, what they've been told. And so being told that your gender is fluid, being told that you're in the car, you're in the driver's seat Anyone that's raised kids knows this like I. Mean, we've had our battles with food at our house, right, people don't want to eat the food that we're giving them, like every kid probably, but so what's the most natural?
Speaker 1:holland's house. They eat everything.
Speaker 3:They're told right they do the holland's house is superior my kids are always obedient with happy hearts and they never cause any trouble that's why.
Speaker 2:That's why we had to have you part-time. Can't do full-time, yet it feels a little too convicting. Um, so part of like it's natural as a parent to be like we just need them to eat food, like they need protein, they need food. This will help all of their problems. They'll stop crying, they'll feel better, they'll probably sleep better. So you get to a point where it feels like the most, the most reasonable, loving thing you can do is to be like what would you like? Here are your choices, here are the options. What, what would what? If you could have any food today, what would it be? Let's work with you. Let's put you in the lead, let's put you as the leader.
Speaker 1:Let's let's know, and then and then we start negotiating, which we're still doing this at our house and I sometimes make this mistake of going, hey, what do you want to eat? And I'm like, oh crap, that was the dumbest thing I could have ever said. I should have said you're eating pancakes, or you're eating sausage, or here's an egg.
Speaker 3:And I fall into that because I treat only ask a, a question if every answer is something you actually want to do. Right, right, right, there you go.
Speaker 2:But it doesn't. The child isn't happy making the choice for themselves, because the minute that they say, oh, I want pancakes, you give them pancakes. Well, they don't want those pancakes or they don't want them cut that way, or they don't want that shape, or they don't want that temperature. I mean, it's not because the shape, the temperature, the cutting, it's not because those things are a problem. It's because the child is torn between feeling this authority, that that is, that is more than they can handle, and feeling and like they're kind of at war internally over the the, the power that they've been given.
Speaker 2:And any child that's given too much power and too much authority isn't is unhappy. They're unhappy children. And so the fact that we are saying as a nation, here's some boundaries what we know from parenting is boundaries create contentment, they create. A child with two Christmas presents, I guarantee you, is more content than the child with 20 on Christmas morning, because there's probably some parenting that goes behind that, that teaches some foundational truths and some contentment. Because it's not the variety, it's not the options, it's not the power that creates the contentment, and I think so.
Speaker 2:I think what's so, what's so mind blowing to me is that there's Christians out there that feel as though giving the humanity an infinite amount of choices is actually the more loving approach, and it's also the approach that will lead to more satisfied, like healthy, happy people, like, like, how ignorant are we? How have we gotten to this point where that feels true? Yeah, yeah. It doesn't. It doesn't even make sense Like go to Disney world, you don't see. You don't see more pissed off kids than you do at Disney World.
Speaker 1:There are no angrier kids, it's the happiest place on earth, adrienne.
Speaker 2:It was like we wanted to make a film the whole time we were there. It was just tantrum after tantrum, after tantrum and it's like you could go to like Georgetown Blue Hole. Okay, there's very few tantrums, it's just like it's free. There's rocks, there's dirt.
Speaker 1:And we make a lot of great games of throwing rocks and skipping rocks.
Speaker 2:It's like children that are given too much. There's just such and not to say Disney World's bad. Who cares? I mean I'll go, I don't care to go but people day long. It's just it there's.
Speaker 3:There's a very normal phenomenon that happens when children are given too much power, unless they're parented by the gregs. Yeah, okay, all right, I I gotta tell you guys something. I don't actually have perfect children.
Speaker 1:No, no, he does they came to our house and they did nothing wrong and lizzie was so sweet and was like act like an adult the whole time she does want to come on the podcast soon, though, oh I would love to have Lizzie Tell her welcome anytime.
Speaker 2:Chris might have told Austin that that's the kind of girl you want to marry someday.
Speaker 1:Yeah, there you go. I was like Lizzie, is quality right there?
Speaker 2:She's true. You might need to start creating some boundaries.
Speaker 3:Boundaries are good. I'm pro boundaries, Adrienne. All right back to what we were talking about. No, I want to hear what Helen was talking about. Yeah, what About what? Your kids? Oh, about my kids. I think I was just saying that I don't have perfect kids because you guys keep making this joke and the podcast listeners need to understand.
Speaker 1:They know you, I mean, they recognize you on sight. What?
Speaker 2:do you think about kids that have too much options, too much authority, too much excessive?
Speaker 3:Yeah, I think boundaries are good, boundaries are healthy with the eating stuff. You know, when my kids say I don't like that, I say, well, that's. You know we're going to work on that. You know you should be able to. I talk about how Jesus sent his disciples out and he told them to go two by two to the different houses. What did he say?
Speaker 1:Eat, whatever is set before you. Boom oh. Do you use that Bible verse with that? Oh yeah.
Speaker 3:Eat whatever's set before you. You know what Sometimes following Jesus means eating a meal that you don't really like. But you're going to be respectful to your host, and so we're going to train you as children, man, and we want to teach you to have good food. So, like I'm a hundred percent.
Speaker 2:That is wild, that's I mean unless you're in Mexico and there's ants and such what was that, unless you're in Mexico, you ate ants.
Speaker 3:Yeah, I don't do mission strips anymore, I'm retired. Yeah, exactly, so I think. Uh, you know that idea, that philosophy. I see the connection you're making, adrian, between, like, the gentle parenting approach and the, you know, total liberal kind of mindset approach toward gender and stuff like that. It's just like all rules are oppressive.
Speaker 1:That's the common denominator. Rules are oppressive.
Speaker 2:Rules are bad.
Speaker 3:Rules are bad. They hurt you, they hold you back. Rules are oppressive. Rules are bad. Rules are bad. They hurt you, they hold you back, whereas you know the the bible is really clear that, like rules, um god's rules lead to blessing.
Speaker 3:Whatever he commands, he blesses his law leads to life, right, obviously, you cannot find justification and salvation from his law, but, as christians, god's law points us in the direction of life and blessing and abundance and goodness. And so, um to say there are only two genders, only two sexes, whatever, male and female? Um, some people, there's a group of people that hear that and sound. It sounds oppressive to them, and what they don't realize is that that the the reason it sounds oppressive is they've adopted an approach that, um, god's rules are hurtful and oppressive to you, whereas in reality, god's rules are going to lead you to happiness, joy, peace, safety. Boundaries are a good thing. Um, we live in boundaries, we, we, we live in a house that has, you know, walls and a roof and a door, and like that, boundaries can protect you. Um, not just hinder you.
Speaker 1:I think we've been told think outside the box. So many times everyone just sort of assumes give me the box, you know, put me inside the box and I will work in there well you want the right boundaries, though there are boundaries that can be hurtful and legalistic, and but that to apply that to all rules is foolish.
Speaker 1:Yeah, I think the greatest way to think about it in my opinion, is from Jocko Willink, not a Christian, but a guy that's smart. He says discipline equals freedom, and I think that that is like a. Something that we can all rally behind is that we need to discipline ourselves and if we can discipline ourselves and we can lead an organization like our family. And I think the hard part is, I think people have seen rules as so oppressive for so long that they can't get inside their head and maybe they remembered that one teacher or one bully or whatever from their past, and so all rules are bad because of that one thing.
Speaker 2:And there's this idea, too, that God must. Well, we don't serve a God that hates these people, and that's true. We don't serve a God that hates people ever, but he hates sin. And so, loving those people who are struggling to accept the boundary of the gender they were born with, loving those people doesn't look like enabling them to continue in a mindset that is detrimental to them, just like we don't allow our kids to Like, if our kids wanted, I mean, there's just so many things our kids can want that are detrimental, like playing switch all day, every day, eating donuts all day, every day. It would be detrimental. They would be miserable people. Allowing our kids to never be challenged, never be pushed, never do anything that makes them feel uncomfortable. Ultimately, it's just not loving to them, like we're not setting them up for anything in life successfully when we protect them from every single thing that feels hard to them in the moment. It's loving them to lead them through the boundary, but I do think that let's just be.
Speaker 1:The reason why we're not doing that is that's way harder to bring, put hard boundaries in, and you have to overcome a tantrum and you have to do it lovingly, you have to, you know, when the tantrum hits, uh, you have to emotively calm down, and we don't all do that well. And again, I think that's why it's so much harder to parent. It's way easier to outsource, and when you outsource parenting, whether it's daycare or school or whatever, you're not going to get that influence into the kid's life, where your word is the law and they obey it. And so you have to overcome a lot of eight hours a day to overcome that, to kind of speak into your kid's life and say, when you are here and when you were with me, this is what you do and that's so. So I don't. It's hard in the moment.
Speaker 2:It's hard in the moment, but it's not hard in the longterm and I think that this is exactly the correlation to both ways. Take, who believes that they are not supposed to be the sex that they were born. It feels easier for them Instead of going and processing with a counselor or whoever why they feel this ostracization between how they're naturally identified, what pain could be there, what questions could be there. It's uncomfortable, it's in the moment to process that, to relive some of the trauma, to vocalize some of the hurt that hurts in the moment. But, matt, but the what happens is we see videos of what happens when you continue to give into the. The what feels good now is now. You create this entire world where people are kids, are like actually using litter boxes and actually walking around on leashes, because at what point does it's?
Speaker 1:called being a furry.
Speaker 2:At what point does giving into what feels good in this moment ever end? It just becomes harder and harder to maintain and you end up with a much more difficult life with many more obstacles, just like with a kid who, when you like, when you just choose to mentally disengage the behavior which we often do in our house, it just makes your day worse and worse, and worse and worse until it explodes yeah, and so it's like it might. In the moment it's more uncomfortable, but in the next, like in the relatively short term- it gets much easier okay, yeah, and I think that that's where so how do we challenge parents?
Speaker 1:I know we started on gender. We ended up in parenting.
Speaker 2:To me it's the same struggle Like helping a. Helping a person walk through the struggle is no different than a child. I just think parenting is like more.
Speaker 1:So, in other words, I think the nation gave up on parenting psycho people that were screaming as men, saying I am a woman and eventually I don't have time to mess with you, I don't want to mess with you, I don't care really about you, be a woman, it's fine, and they didn't think about the ramifications for the rest of society beyond that person's individual liberty to say whatever they want to be. Because once you give somebody the authorization to go from a man to a woman, now you've given them access to bathrooms and access all the things that no one really probably thought through the ramifications of that. We just want to have individual liberty.
Speaker 2:And why is it that you are resisting your gender? Maybe because something sexually happened to you, right? Maybe that's why, if that is, is why allowing you access into bathrooms where you don't belong is setting you up for to be a repeat offender to the very trauma that has wrecked your life, and so it's not loving you to give you access and it, but it's like, so then, oh so, then that's now. Now it's time to put a loving boundary. We're not going to give you access to that bathroom so you can't repeat. It's like the logic makes, it makes no sense, and it comes down to like having to the desires and the, the feelings in the moment that are not, that are sinful and wrong. It's just, it's more loving and it's more freeing to acknowledge those for what they are.
Speaker 1:Yeah, I mean, the wild thing is we in loudon county I think it was like you had a guy to transition, a man, transitional woman as a teenager went to a girl's bathroom, raped a girl. They then moved him from the school, didn't tell the next school. He went to the bathroom, raped another girl. That that was like the thing, that sort of sent, exploded the thing.
Speaker 1:Matt walsh went to loudon county and said we can't do this. This is the most dangerous crazy thing and I think eventually the school board reversed course on that. But it was wild to see the thinking and danger that the no boundaries thing just do whichever you want to do was put on high school kids whose brains aren't fully developed, who don't know how to function in society, are dealing with hormones and emotions and raging everything, and so to think that they're going to have the mental capacity without boundaries to function in a world, it's going to be a Lord of the Flies and that's what it was and I think that's the problem that I think we're facing with our culture. Any final thoughts on that Holland?
Speaker 3:Yeah, I still think the. I just kind of want to see what's going to happen with the implicit acknowledgement of personhood at conception too. So not just the gender issue, but see how this is going to impact the abortion issue as well, because if you're defining male and female as a person who belongs to the sex that produces this, you know what's it called.
Speaker 2:Chromosome.
Speaker 3:Gamete. How did it word it? Let me see.
Speaker 2:Reproductive organ.
Speaker 3:Okay, person, yeah, belonging at conception to the sex that produces the small reproductive cell. So what I'm interested in, and what I want to kind of see what happens here, is if this definition of personhood beginning at conception really makes an impact on totally abolishing abortion. Because if it's a person and you end its life, you have just committed murder, and so this may and they may not have realized that when they put it in there they were trying to be super clear about the gender and sex issues but, without realizing, may have put something in there that completely abolishes abortion.
Speaker 2:So, yeah, that's my prayer, because they you could have said at birth right.
Speaker 3:But they said at conception, they said at conception.
Speaker 2:So I don't think that was accidental At birth is more what you're thinking when you think?
Speaker 2:of gender, you think, because you discover the gender when they come out of the mother. Even the tests beforehand feel kind of iffy. And so the fact that they said conception, that doesn't seem. It seems like the easier accident would have been to say at birth, and so it feels optimistic. And that's the whole Christian argument for why not abortion. It has nothing to do with the fact that we're not understanding of the situation these women are placed into. It has absolutely nothing to do with that. It has everything to do with the fact that this is a child whose life God has ordained at conception. And so I mean man. That would be really interesting.
Speaker 1:And it is going against kind of what the I have the Republican platform up says. We proudly stand for families and life. We believe that the 14th Amendment to the Constitution of the United States guarantees that no person can be denied life or liberty without due process and that the states are therefore free to pass laws protecting those rights, which I think is weird, that you'd have to pass a law to protect those rights if they're a federal given right. But that's where I think they get and after 51 years, because of us, I like that that power has been given to the states and to a vote for the people. We oppose late-term abortions while supporting mothers and policies that advance prenatal care, access to birth control and IVF. Anyway, it is. But I feel like those, the thing that you read and that platform is in conflict a little bit because they're not leaving it up to the states saying this is a person, is a person from conception, which would rule out early abortions.
Speaker 3:Yeah, I mean, I guess they're not a. To be a citizen, you have to be born in the united states, so you're not a citizen yet, but you are a person. So I feel like even you know laws against murder, you don't? You can't just not murder citizens, you, you can't murder persons, right?
Speaker 1:so I don't know I I'm curious to see where that'll go yeah, because like if you murdered, like uh, an illegal alien or something, you'd still go to murder? Yeah, you still committed murder, and so it's not just citizenship, yeah, so it's personhood.
Speaker 3:Yeah, Uh, who knows? I mean, my prayer is for abortion to be completely abolished. That, um, yeah, we'll see what happens.
Speaker 1:But well, you know you heard it here first at Pastor Plex Podcast and we are reporting on the news pretty much like lightning speed around here sometimes. So we're grateful for everything you guys are. Make sure you text us in 737-231-0605, or you can leave a comment on Facebook or YouTube. Cody Sparks from the Cody Sparks Band. He's behind the production studio wall. Cody, any thoughts over there? From the Cody Sparks Band? All right?
Speaker 2:Great.
Speaker 1:Yeah, okay, all right, well, hey, thanks so much for watching From our house to yours. Have an awesome week of worship.